Literature DB >> 17215035

Bonding to ground versus unground enamel in fluorosed teeth.

R Banu Ermis1, Jan De Munck, Marcio Vivan Cardoso, Eduardo Coutinho, Kirsten L Van Landuyt, André Poitevin, Paul Lambrechts, Bart Van Meerbeek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of grinding on the bonding effectiveness of a self-etch and an etch-and-rinse adhesive to fluorosed enamel.
METHODS: The teeth were classified using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov index (TFI). Fluorosed teeth (TFI=5) obtained from Isparta (Turkey) and control teeth (TFI=0) obtained from Leuven (Belgium) were used. Using a depth-marking diamond bur, 0.3mm of enamel was removed from mid-buccal and mid-palatal/lingual surfaces of the teeth, whereas the area adjacent to the ground area was left unprepared. A two-step self-etch (Clearfil Protect Bond, Kuraray) and a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Optibond FL, Kerr) were used to bond the resin composite to the ground and unground enamel. Rectangular micro-specimens were prepared using the slow-speed diamond saw and tested in tensile to determine the micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS).
RESULTS: The microTBS to unground fluorosed enamel was significantly lower than to ground fluorosed enamel for Clearfil Protect Bond (15.8+/-15.2 and 45.0+/-12.4MPa, p<0.0001) and for Optibond FL (35.5+/-21.4 and 50.5+/-12.3MPa, p<0.05), respectively. In control teeth, Clearfil Protect Bond bonded better to ground enamel (p<0.01), whereas OptiBond FL exhibited a similar bonding effectiveness to ground and unground enamel (p=0.0634). SIGNIFICANCE: Preparation of enamel improved the resin-enamel bond strength in fluorosed teeth. The bonding effectiveness to unground enamel was lower in fluorosed teeth than in control teeth for the self-etch adhesive tested.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17215035     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  6 in total

1.  Microleakage of Class V Methacrylate and Silorane-based Composites and Nano-ionomer Restorations in Fluorosed Teeth.

Authors:  Fereshteh Shafiei; Mohadese Abouheydari
Journal:  J Dent (Shiraz)       Date:  2015-06

2.  Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite Resin to Normal and Fluorotic Enamel After Microabrasion.

Authors:  Mahshid Mohammadi Bassir; Mohammad Bagher Rezvani; Elham Tabatabai Ghomsheh; Zahra Malek Hosseini
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2016-11

3.  Effect of phosphoric acid concentration used for etching on the microtensile bond strength to fluorotic teeth.

Authors:  Mengqin Gu; Linhu Lv; Xiaoping He; Wangyang Li; Ling Guo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  Direct esthetic rehabilitation of teeth with severe fluorosis: a case report.

Authors:  F Shafiei; Ms Tavangar; Aa Alavi
Journal:  J Dent (Shiraz)       Date:  2014-03

5.  The Effect of Four Surface Treatment Methods on the Shear Bond Strength of Metallic Brackets to the Fluorosed Enamel.

Authors:  Hooman Zarif Najafi; Vahid Moshkelgosha; Atefeh Khanchemehr; Akram Alizade; Ali Mokhtar
Journal:  J Dent (Shiraz)       Date:  2015-09

6.  Evaluation of enamel damages following orthodontic bracket debonding in fluorosed teeth bonded with adhesion promoter.

Authors:  Tahreh Baherimoghadam; Sahar Akbarian; Reza Rasouli; Navid Naseri
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.